ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Efgartigimod as a potential alternative to intravenous immunoglobulin in Guillain-Barré syndrome: a retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Efgartigimod for Guillain-Barré syndrome: rationale, clinical evidence, and future perspectives.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: A disabling peripheral nervous system disorder, Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), has very limited treatment options. However, some patients have poor outcomes even after receiving treatment. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of efgartigimod versus intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) for treating GBS with disability. Patients and methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from GBS patients who were unable to walk independently and were admitted between January 1, 2023, and February 28, 2025. Our primary outcome was the proportion of patients able to walk independently at week 4 and able to run at week 12. Results: After including 34 patients in the study, we divided them into two groups: 12 in the efgartigimod group and 22 in the IVIG group. Patients on efgartigimod displayed numerically better short-term (100% vs. 64%, Conclusion: Efgartigimod showed favorable safety and clinical efficacy for treating GBS with disability in this single-center retrospective study, with notable clinical improvement observed in patients with ophthalmoplegia and respiratory insufficiency. Larger prospective studies are needed to validate these preliminary findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.